K.Meganathan v. Dr.D.Karthikeyan, I.A.S., And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-04-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR K.Meganathan Petitioner Vs

1. Dr.D.Karthikeyan, I.A.S., Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supplies Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2.J.Kumaragurubaran, I.A.S., Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

Contemnors PRAYER Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for their wilful and intentional disobedience to the order of this Court passed in W.P. No.5462 of 2020 dated 25.02.2025. For Petitioner:

Mr.G.Bala and Daisy ‍ For Contemnors:

Mr.V.Veluchamy, Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.S.Gopinathan, Standing Counsel for R2

ORDER

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order 1/5

of this Court dated 25.02.2025 in W.P.No.5462 of 2020 whereby this Court had directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the basis of the Judgement passed in W.A.No.1615 of 2018, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order.

2. When the Contempt Petition is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the petitioner initiating the present Contempt Petition the respondents have passed an order dated 28.03.2026 rejecting the case of the petitioner which action of the respondents is contra to the order of this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents however submits that this Court by the aforesaid order, dated 25.02.2025 in the said Writ Petition, had directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders and accordingly the respondents taking note of the circumstances have passed orders on 28.03.2026, rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents further contends that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he has to assail the said order, dated 2/5

28.03.2026, rejecting his claim and as against the same, the petitioner cannot press the present Contempt petition. Having regard to the order dated 25.02.2025, whereby this Court had directed the Respondents to pass appropriate orders, and the respondents having now passed order, dated 28.03.2026, this Court is of the view, the respondents have complied with order of this Court, though with a delay.

5. Further, the direction of this Court being only to consider the case of the petitioner, the said direction cannot be constituted as a positive direction to grant the relief to the petitioner based on the order in W.A.No.1615/2018. Thus, if the said order is not to the satisfaction of the petitioner, he has to challenge the same separately and the corrections of the said order cannot be considered in Contempt Petition.

6. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to assail the said order dated 28.03.2026. No costs.

10-04-2026 vum Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order 3/5

T. VINOD KUMAR,J., vum To 1.Dr.D.Karthikeyan, I.A.S., Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supplies Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2.J.Kumaragurubaran, I.A.S., Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

10.04.2026 4/5

5/5